THE BUILDING OF A NEW CHURCH DEDICATED TO SAINT JULIAN IN 1682 Eugene F. Montanaro When Achille Ferres wrote his Descrizione Storica Delle Chiese Di Malta E Gozo (1866), he recorded of the village of Saint Julians, somewhat summarily: La sua primitiva chiesuola e antichissima, fabbricata verso if 1580. Essa pero venne riedificata nel1682 .1 Though quite remarkably accurate, Ferres' s account does not provide specific source notes, and cannot therefore be regarded as authoritative. In this short study I shall attempt to place on record for the first time, archival material concerning the building of a new church at Saint Julians in 1682. The relevant documentation tends to confirm Achille Ferres's unequivocal assertion that this new church was in fact built on the site of a humble chapel. THE SUPPLICA The licence (called a faculty) to demolish the existing chapel dedicated to St. Julian and to rebuild a larger church, was obtained from the competent ecclesiastical authorities on 2 March 1682. The necessary permit was granted in answer to a supplica, or petition, submitted to the Bishop of Malta by Don Mario Haxixa and Domenico Gat, procuratori della Ven. Chiesa sotto titolo diS. Giuliano, posta nei limiti della Chiesa Parochiale e Collegiata di Birchircara.2 The petition, though perhaps laconic in style and content, is nonetheless revealing and, to a certain extent, anecdotal. The special aim of the petitioners Haxixa and Gat was the consolidation of the ever increasing veneration which the faithful in these islands were manifesting towards the existing chapel dedicated to St. Julian: per maggior culto divino et augmento della devotione che tiene verso detta Chiesa if popolo di questa Isola di ABBREVIATIONS A A M Archiepiscopal Archives, Malta. N A V Notarial Archives, Valletta. NAG Notarial Archives, Gozo. N L M National Library of Malta. 1 A. Ferres, Descrizione Storica Delle Chiese Di Malte E Gozo, (Malta 1866), pp. 326- 327. 2 N A V, R30/24, f.240r. A copy of the Supplica is appended to Notary Pietro Attard's contract of 6 March 1682. 36 EUGENE F. MONTANARO Malta. 3 For the purpose of achieving this goal, the petitioners proposed the demolition of the existing chapel and the building of a larger and more decent church in its stead. In formal petitions of this nature, applicants were required to furnish the authorities with a clear indication of the source of the funds to be expended in the construction of the proposed building. In this respect, Haxixa and Gat hastened to inform the Bishop that a benefactor, a certain Magnifico Baltassare Ciantar, had offered to defray the greater part of the expenses to be incurred in the building of the new church. Moreover, it would seem that the petitioners had taken the liberty to instruct an architect to draw up a plan for the proposed new building. Indeed, from the supplica it transpires that the master mason and building contractor Bartholomeo Camilleri had agreed to charge 120 scudi for building the new church. And he could hardly have committed himself to such figure without having some a priori acquaintance with the physical appearance of the proposed edifice! Be that as it may, the petitioners sought the necessary licence to help raise the sum of 120 scudi by applying thereto the interests accruing on moneys administered by them, as well as small offerings donated for the purpose by the faithful. There were of course no local residents to help fund the building of the new church. In 1682, the village of Saint Julians had not yet come into being! But it is fairly evident from the supplica, and from the report following the pastoral visitation by Bishop Gargallo in 1601, that the existing church had assumed the role of a minor shrine, and that it had been enriched with the votive offerings of pilgrims who flocked to it from various parts of the island.4 And it is therefore not unreasonable to assume that the petitioners hoped to draw upon the random offerings effected by visiting pilgrims and devotees to add to their building fund. The ecclesiastical authorities responded favourably to the requests of the procurators, Haxixa and Gat. The Curia's fiat is expressed in the customary terse Latin formula: Facultatem petitam oratoribus concedimus, datum in Palatio Episcopate Valletta die 11 Martii 1682. L. Famucellus Vic. Gen. 5 3 Ibid. 4 See J.E. Storace, The Old Parish Church, in Stanley Fiorini ed. The Centenary of a Parish: St. Julian's 1891-1991, Malta 1992, 119-131. 5 N A V, R30/4, f.240v. A copy of this Decree is appended to Notary Pietro Attard's contract of 6 March 1682. A NEW CHURCH DEDICATED TO SAINT JULIAN 37 Two fundamental points emerge from the supplica. The petitioners did not attempt to render a rough or approximate estimate of the total cost of the whole project. It is, however, necessary to bear in mind that the project would inevitably involve ancillary costs, such as transport expenses, the wages of stone polishers and carpenters, the purchase of new furnishings more appropriate for a larger structure, and so on. Presumably, therefore, at this preliminary stage, the petitioners were in no position to draw up a meticulously detailed stima of the overall scheme. The second point concerns the titulus of the church which is the subject of this article. Throughout the nineteenth century and indeed up to the present times, the church is often referred to as TaLapsi (Church of the Ascension). 6 But it is apparent from the supplica, and from the tenor of contemporary documents which we shall consider in due course, that in 1682, the church was officially and unequivocally dedicated to St. Julian the Hospitaller. THE FIRST CONTRACT The available evidence concerning the construction of a new church in 1682 derives primarily from notarial deeds and a rudimentary ledger of expenses submitted to the Bishop's Curia by the procurators of the existing chapel, Don Mario Haxixa and Domenico Gat. The relative contract of works was drawn up in Latin by Notary Pietro Attard, in Valletta, on 6 March 1682.7 The parties to this agreement were the procurators of the existing chapel dedicated to St. Julian, Don Mario Haxixa praesbitero and Domenico Gat, both hailing from Birkirkara, and the master mason and building contractor Magister Bartolomeo Camilleri, who resided in Gudja. Also present on the deed was the benefactor Magnifico Baltassar Ciantar, son of Battista, hailing from Valletta. Ciantar was indeed a pivotal figure in the agreement since he contracted to disburse a substantial sum of money for the building of the new church. On the contract, the master mason Bartolomeo Camilleri promised and agreed by a solemn undertaking with the aforementioned procurators to demolish the existing church dedicated to St. Julian in the parochial limits of Birkirkara, and to rebuild a larger and more decent church on its site. In building the new church, Bartolomeo Camilleri was to conform with the design prepared by the architect, 6 See A. Ferres, op. cit., p. 326. 7 N A V, R30/24, f.237r. The deed was witnessed by the Deacon Don Laurentius Dimegh, residing at Birkirkara, and Don Giovanni Sammut, residing at Casal Balzano. 38 EUGENE F. MONTANARO Magister Vincenzo Casanova. The contract makes specific mention of the fact that Vincenzo Casanova's architectural design for the new church had been carefully examined and approved by the parties to the deed, and that the same design was in the custody of the master mason Bartolomeo Camilleri. Clauses such as this were indeed not uncommon in contemporary deeds regulating the construction of urban and ecclesiastical edifices. Perhaps a more interesting piece of information in this regard, is that which derives from the ledger of expenses drawn up by the procurators of the church, recording the fee paid to Vincenzo Casanova for his plan for the new church. The relative entry, which is undated, reads as follows: Piu di scudo uno et tari otto dati a Maestro Censo Casanova per if suo travaglio nel designare Ia suddetta Chiesa, sive 1 - 8- 0. 8 The second significant clause in the contract concerns the measurements of the new church and the time-limit for the completion of the works. In terms of the agreement, the new church was to have an internal width of 26 palmi and a running length of 52 palmi; moreover, its height, measured from the pavement to the roof, was to be one of 45 palmi. The contract also stipulated an optimistic completion date of six months to be reckoned from the date of the relative deed, that is, from 6 March 1682. However, the deed provides no penalty clause for breach of contract. Next come the clauses that regulate the quantum of the building contractor's fee, and the mode of payment. Inevitably, these clauses link up with Baltassare Ciantar's undertaking to furnish funds for the building of the new church. And it would seem that the architectural components of the proposed edifice had a direct bearing on the contractual obligations of the parties in regard to all these matters in the manner I shall attempt to explain below. Unfortunately, Vincenzo Casanova's plan for the new church was not appended to the initial contract. Moreover, I must admit that I have not been able to trace a copy of this plan. It may be recalled, however, that the practice of appending plans to notarial deeds did not emerge as a widespread local custom until well into the 19th century. Be that as it may, this lacuna necessitates a careful scrutiny of the words of the contract.